Anthony Hughes retweeted
Microsoft $MSFT: "We will access additional sources of funding when we believe it is attractive to do so."
Up 60% in the last 4 months and ~at ATH in after-hours.. Have to think right now would be a pretty attractive time to raise capital.
Up 60% in the last 4 months and ~at ATH in after-hours.. Have to think right now would be a pretty attractive time to raise capital.
3
2
28
5,443
Anthony Hughes retweeted
MSFT investors GOOG investors
after earnings: after earnings:
after earnings: after earnings:
32
79
1,085
44,143
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Only take worth reading tbh
you may be exhausted with $ANT S-1 takes, but I really enjoyed working on this piece: mbi-deepdives.com/ant-s1/
2
6
77
15,455
Anthony Hughes retweeted
The Anthropic prospectus is a snapshot of a young and evolving company, analogous to a (precocious and very bright) kindergartner's report card, but a very noisy indicator of what the future will deliver. bit.ly/3UTo3Gj
2
4
45
15,603
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Anthropic's IPO was filed on October 26, 2026, and I value it's equity at about $1.475 trillion, which will inform my decision on whether to buy or sell its shares. To make your Anthropic choice, though, you should value it yourself, and I will provide a story and input structure to help you. bit.ly/3UTo3Gj
70
264
2,141
352,883
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Super interesting comparison of GPU finance and the AI buildout to airlines. I’ve seen two other people make this comparison now:
1. Ken Griffin
2. Sridhar Ramaswamy
Both are very, very smart so worth learning more.
1. Ken Griffin
2. Sridhar Ramaswamy
Both are very, very smart so worth learning more.
A lot of ink has been spilled on GPU financing lately. I spent over a decade trading ABS on Wall St, and structured over $2B+ of debt financings as an operator (including at @tryramp). Figured I'd try to make sense of this market, so I went back to a framework I knew well: ft engine ABS.
My take: a GPU neocloud runs on airline economics, and the debt behind it looks a lot like aircraft engine ABS.
The parallels:
• Perishable inventory. An empty seat after the door closes is gone forever. So is an idle hour on an energized H100 rack.
• 85%+ of cost is fixed (servers, 10-year rack leases, 10-14% debt service). One more hour of compute costs pennies of power.
• Utilization is everything. Airlines break even around 80% load factor, a levered GPU cluster around 65-75%. The returns live in those last 25 percentage points.
• NVIDIA is Boeing and Airbus rolled into one. Powered shells and grid interconnects are the new airport slots.
• Wall St copied the aircraft financing playbook: take-or-pay contract plus servers in a bankruptcy-remote SPV, 70-80% LTV.
Part 1 of my blog post goes into a lot more detail:
alexyangsong.com/blog/aluminum-…
151
101
1,449
410,817
Anthony Hughes retweeted
@RamaswmySridhar should fight. The two companies are complementary. Since you're not doing this AI stuff, I really think Snowflake should consider getting its AI tokens through Databricks. You can get both cheap OSS models as well as frontier (OAI/Ant/Gemini/Grok) models from our platform. It all goes through Unity Gateway which has Smart Routing, Budgets, and Access Control. You can even use Omnigent with any harness, including CoCo. Most of our customers used this to reduce token spend ~30% last few months while token count went up. Genie lets you then track, control, manage that spend, all your financials, marketing, etc. Quick POC?
84
115
1,506
164,115
Anthony Hughes retweeted
This is a list of the richest people in 1989.
I would never have guessed a single one outside of Sam Walton.
The world has changed a lot in 40 years.
I would never have guessed a single one outside of Sam Walton.
The world has changed a lot in 40 years.
113
202
3,679
684,312
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Here’s the thing - If stock were consideration for compute, GAAP would require booking the equity issued as part of the compute cost, and the filing would have to disclose non-cash consideration for the related-party purchases.
Spoiler alert - There's no such disclosure.
So many people were SO convinced that Anthropic could never be profitable that even when the numbers are right in front of them the pretzel braining continues
Spoiler alert - There's no such disclosure.
So many people were SO convinced that Anthropic could never be profitable that even when the numbers are right in front of them the pretzel braining continues
Great take on this today on CNBC from Roger McNamee: cnbc.com/video/2026/10/…
Several of you said the same thing yesterday in the comments; i.e. $ANT's "Compute and infrastructure" cost was unrealistically low because it swapped equity for massive discounts.
19
2
74
16,193
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Pretty difficult to know what to make of these Anthropic margins given so many of their early compute deals were simultaneously funding deals and are impossible to fair value price. Have to underwrite it at "fair" price of compute which is...
3
2
22
2,621
Anthony Hughes retweeted
If u don’t think we are near the top with tweets like this then idk what to tell u
Instinct is currently raising @ $30b.
$100M → $500M → $2.5B → $10B → ~$30B in sub 1y.
If you're still not inside the private market this should be a good signal to pivot aggressively.
Wealth creation is going to be heavily skewed toward private investors over the coming decade.
13
6
204
29,953
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Steve Eisman - Who called the 2008 crash - says the entire market is now "one trade," and it "better succeed"
"Even people who think they're diversified because they own bonds are NOT really that diversified"
The Big Short investor sold Google to cut his AI exposure and is s worrying him:
> He Sold Google, Now In Cash (0:06):
- A stock he's "owned... I can't even tell you how long" - sold to reduce AI exposure. He won't replace it with defensive names: people "don't want to shift out of it to buy Clorox."
> If AI Fails, "A Big Correction" (0:52):
- It's binary: AI succeeds and the market keeps climbing, or "I think we have a big correction." How big? "That's a hard question. I don't know."
> "It's All One Trade" (1:07):
- In a 60/40 portfolio, "more than 50 percent" of the stocks is "tech and AI related," and "most of the new issuance of bonds is AI related." Then: "What scares me is that it's all one trade. So it better succeed."
> "Incestuous" Circular Deals (4:03):
- The latest Nvidia deal is "so incestuous" and "totally convoluted" - "you don't know if there's any real profitability" in the machinations.
He's not even an AI skeptic - it's going to be "something really good" (3:53)
BUT "that doesn't mean that everybody succeeds"
He actually moved to cash. Most crash calls come with no position behind them
I traced every big AI CRASH CALL to its source and scored who was right ↓
"Even people who think they're diversified because they own bonds are NOT really that diversified"
The Big Short investor sold Google to cut his AI exposure and is s worrying him:
> He Sold Google, Now In Cash (0:06):
- A stock he's "owned... I can't even tell you how long" - sold to reduce AI exposure. He won't replace it with defensive names: people "don't want to shift out of it to buy Clorox."
> If AI Fails, "A Big Correction" (0:52):
- It's binary: AI succeeds and the market keeps climbing, or "I think we have a big correction." How big? "That's a hard question. I don't know."
> "It's All One Trade" (1:07):
- In a 60/40 portfolio, "more than 50 percent" of the stocks is "tech and AI related," and "most of the new issuance of bonds is AI related." Then: "What scares me is that it's all one trade. So it better succeed."
> "Incestuous" Circular Deals (4:03):
- The latest Nvidia deal is "so incestuous" and "totally convoluted" - "you don't know if there's any real profitability" in the machinations.
He's not even an AI skeptic - it's going to be "something really good" (3:53)
BUT "that doesn't mean that everybody succeeds"
He actually moved to cash. Most crash calls come with no position behind them
I traced every big AI CRASH CALL to its source and scored who was right ↓
36
73
757
79,837
Anthony Hughes retweeted
As an old colleague of mine used to say “there’s a reason the guy’s a billionaire”.
Sridhar’s read is excellent. I would add one thing: token yield is changing faster than any commodity we’ve ever seen.
Sridhar’s read is excellent. I would add one thing: token yield is changing faster than any commodity we’ve ever seen.
1/16 the ai industry is making an unusual bet: buy compute for years, sell intelligence by the token. banks, commodity merchants, airlines, utilities and cloud providers each explain a different part of the risk.
16
59
1,054
187,808
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Lets be clear here, $ANT is not "hiding" their capex spend. They are simply initiating the IPO process and unveiling their financials before the bulk of their infrastructure commitments begin impacting cash flows.
At the time of their S-1 release, they are sourcing most of their rs. Those costs generally flow through OpEx, not CapEx. That is not indicative of what their future will always look like, mgmt literally tells you that in the report.
They have about $637B across major infra agreements spanning from 2026-2036 and most have JUST STARTED and some have yet to begin. $431B of this is basically non cancellable minimum spending and lease commitments.
Once again, this is clearly listed in the S-1 (pages 169-172). It was never hidden.
Now the other item I see discussed on here is that equity linked financing and warrants could be providing favorable compute pricing. This is entirely possible. After all, CSPs would want to help get a generational company off the ground if it would come with $100B+ commitments afterwards. I generally don't see anything wrong w the idea that this would take place. From the perspective of the CSPs it was a strong upfront investment (if true).
Lets keep in mind that they are already approaching a $68B ARR based on Q3 2026 from $9B in 2025. They are growing at a rate we haven't really seen before, but their future commitments could present immense risk if that doesn't continue.
Oh and the $108B convertible notes payable on the BS is simply the FV of their convertible financing becoming more valuable as $ANTs valuation increased.
Lots of exaggerated FUD on either side of this debate when the answers are quite simple.
At the time of their S-1 release, they are sourcing most of their rs. Those costs generally flow through OpEx, not CapEx. That is not indicative of what their future will always look like, mgmt literally tells you that in the report.
They have about $637B across major infra agreements spanning from 2026-2036 and most have JUST STARTED and some have yet to begin. $431B of this is basically non cancellable minimum spending and lease commitments.
Once again, this is clearly listed in the S-1 (pages 169-172). It was never hidden.
Now the other item I see discussed on here is that equity linked financing and warrants could be providing favorable compute pricing. This is entirely possible. After all, CSPs would want to help get a generational company off the ground if it would come with $100B+ commitments afterwards. I generally don't see anything wrong w the idea that this would take place. From the perspective of the CSPs it was a strong upfront investment (if true).
Lets keep in mind that they are already approaching a $68B ARR based on Q3 2026 from $9B in 2025. They are growing at a rate we haven't really seen before, but their future commitments could present immense risk if that doesn't continue.
Oh and the $108B convertible notes payable on the BS is simply the FV of their convertible financing becoming more valuable as $ANTs valuation increased.
Lots of exaggerated FUD on either side of this debate when the answers are quite simple.
10
10
95
16,420
Anthony Hughes retweeted
Dan Loeb says the investors who underperformed or did not survive the last decade were stuck on deep value and low multiples, and explains how moving into quality companies opened up a whole new world for him
“No, they still exist all the time. The real opportunity today is kind rstanding those types of opportunities and looking for something that combines that with business quality lens."
"So let’s talk about how my business evolved and how we evolved. I think if you look at a lot of the people who have underperformed or haven’t survived the last decade or so, when people were really stuck on the idea of deep value, low multiples, and being really stubborn about how they viewed businesses, and less flexible about moving into higher multiple companies or growthier companies."
"We basically just started to look at companies that grew faster, that had better returns on capital, that were quote unquote quality businesses. That kind of opened up a whole new world for us."
"So I would call that kind of the other significant part of what we do, which would be quality investing, thematic investing, and that’s when we started to organize our team around industry experts and less generalists and less around the transactions.”
“No, they still exist all the time. The real opportunity today is kind rstanding those types of opportunities and looking for something that combines that with business quality lens."
"So let’s talk about how my business evolved and how we evolved. I think if you look at a lot of the people who have underperformed or haven’t survived the last decade or so, when people were really stuck on the idea of deep value, low multiples, and being really stubborn about how they viewed businesses, and less flexible about moving into higher multiple companies or growthier companies."
"We basically just started to look at companies that grew faster, that had better returns on capital, that were quote unquote quality businesses. That kind of opened up a whole new world for us."
"So I would call that kind of the other significant part of what we do, which would be quality investing, thematic investing, and that’s when we started to organize our team around industry experts and less generalists and less around the transactions.”
Bill Nygren explains how 20 colleagues and an assigned devil’s advocate attack every new idea, then flip sides when it is time to sell
“It’s a it’s a relatively intimidating setting. You’ve got about 20 investment professionals basically trying to shoot holes in your idea. But find more of our mistakes before we lose client money in them than than we do, you know, have them end up in the portfolio."
"We assign someone the job of being devil’s advocate and presenting the opposite case so that we’ve got these two people arguing with each other in front of all of us and the rest of us all asking questions."
"Basically all the questions are negative at this point because the analyst is already presenting this as: this is going to be a potentially very good idea. So we’re all focused on why might it not be a good idea."
"Now later in the process after we’ve owned a stock and the analyst is saying it’s time to sell it, everything reverses. So all of us then are saying, are you sure you’re being aggressive enough on the growth rate? Is there a reason we don’t think this can obtain an average multiple for its industry?"
"So the questions are all pushing the other direction. So the analyst is is always at odds with everyone else in the room.”
3
13
91
36,712
